Survival Philosophy: Interview with Ragnar Benson

CENTERFOLD

PHOTO BY DAVID BJORKMAN/NATIONAL NEWS SERVICE

oo : = : , ae : :
The owner of this concealed, low-profile retreat located in the country obviously expects to survive

28

any nuclear and economic crisis. From The Survival Retreat.

SURVIVAL PHILOSOPHY

A STOREHOUSE DOES NOT A SURVIVALIST MAKE

by Virginia Thomas, writer
David Bjorkman, photographer
National News Service

DENVER (NNS)—Survivalist author
Ragnar Benson recently stopped over at
Stapleton International Airport for this
interview. Savvy to the ways of the world,
both from his farm boy background and
his international travels, Benson is noted
for his practical—albeit extraordinary —
ideas on self-sufficiency. The answers he

gives here represent some of the philos-
ophies found in his newest book The
Survival Retreat.

Q: In your opinion, why do people be-
come survivalists?

A: People invest their time and money in
survivalism because they have a genuine
concern about their futures. They feel
that the equipment they buy, the knowl-
edge they acquire and the supplies they
lay back gives them a sort of guarantee for
the future, an ability to react positively to

what may seem a hopeless situation.

Q: You write in The Survival Retreat
that setting up a retreat is “practicing the
art of the possible.” What do you mean ?

A: Not everyone in every situation can
put together a retreat. Very poor people
and people with other priorities really
can’t spend the time and money to pre-
pare aretreat. What I’m suggesting is that
a person can formulate a retreat philos-
ophy based on what he actually has or
can easily get. He should understand that
no one else can write a concise, detailed
formula that will apply to his situation.
Someone who lives in the center of
Denver will have different retreat re-
quirements than someone who lives in
the Montana mountains. A person needs
to determine what his assets are and then,
in a very clever and ambitious way, plan
to use them to his best advantage.

Q: You also write that survivalists are peo-
ple who have assessed the possibilities
and prepared. How many people do you
think actually do that?

A: I think that quite a few people have
assessed the possibilities; the antinuke
crowd, for instance, sees a very high
probability for a nuclear war. Many survi-
valists also feel that way. But the antinuke
crowd seems to have a great deal of faith
in government. It seems to me the better
part of idiocy to have much faith in our
own government, let alone that the
Soviets will disarm or in any way disadvan-
tage themselves militarily. But getting
back to your original questions, no, I
don’t think that many people are making
valid preparations.

Q: So what about the others—the unpre-
pared? What shall we label them?

A: The label I’m tempted to apply is
“lazy.” Too many are content to sit and
watch TV, which is really very passive.
Maybe “passive” is a better label. I think
that survivors are participants in their
own future. The others just aren’t that
interested in preparing, or may have, in
fact, already given up and feel they have
no future. And I really don’t have any
argument with those people. I don’t
stand ona soapbox and suggest that their
philosophy is in error. I operate from the
viewpoint that there has always been sur-
vival of the fittest and that the fittest are
those who are making preparations and
pursuing their goals with enthusiasm. By
definition, the survivors will be the fittest.
Q: Why do you want to live through and
beyond the crisis?

A: I guess I have a strong zest for life in

16 PALADIN
Sige ee ee ee ee SS eS